Trump Drops List of EVERY Democrat and Enabler Who Used Violent Language Against Trump Which Led to 2nd Assassination Attempt

Whether a decision about Trump’s culpability for Jan. 6 could have come any earlier is unclear. The delays in examining that question began before Garland was even confirmed. Sherwin, senior Justice Department officials and Paul Abbate, the top deputy to FBI Director Christopher A. Wray, quashed a plan by prosecutors in the U.S. attorney’s office to directly investigate Trump associates for any links to the riot, deeming it premature, according to five individuals familiar with the decision. Instead, they insisted on a methodical approach — focusing first on rioters and going up the ladder.

 
By Carol D. Leonnig
and
Aaron C. Davis
Updated June 20, 2023 at 8:15 p.m. EDT|Published June 19, 2023 at 8:00 a.m. EDT

A Washington Post investigation found that more than a year would pass before prosecutors and FBI agents jointly embarked on a formal probe of actions directed from the White House to try to steal the election. Even then, the FBI stopped short of identifying the former president as a focus of that investigation.

A wariness about appearing partisan, institutional caution, and clashes over how much evidence was sufficient to investigate the actions of Trump and those around him all contributed to the slow pace. Garland and the deputy attorney general, Lisa Monaco, charted a cautious course aimed at restoring public trust in the department while some prosecutors below them chafed, feeling top officials were shying away from looking at evidence of potential crimes by Trump and those close to him, The Post found.

you said the FBI didn't do an investigation


FBI finds scant evidence U.S. Capitol attack was coordinated​

 
He believes that her poor leadership will lead to an escalation by Russia, Iran, Hezbollah and such escalations will spread and begin WWIII. I get that, weak leadership already began the proxy war with Russia in Ukraine and the proxy war with Iran in Israel.
Poor leadership ME ass!

You RACISTS, SEXISTS, HATERS, and LOSERS are pathetic! I GET THAT!
 
Last edited:
I saw all the House Committee hearings on Jan. 6. Trump, with overwhelming evidence, organized the Capitol attack.

He refused advice by top advisors to call the National Guard.
After three hours he told the mob, "you are loved."
I see your problem now. you're insane. go get some help
 
Some are the same thing, others are suggesting that Trump is the problem to which the solution is his removal from existence. The difference I would see is in the suggestion that the person is the danger rather than the consequences of their poor decisions being the danger.

So. "If you elect Jimbo Jones, bad things will happen" =/= "Jimbo Jones is a danger to democracy". Can you see the difference? I know you can, actually.
The irony is trump calling everyone a danger that must be removed has made the obvious rhetorical response to call him a danger that must be removed, which in turn causes him to call everyone a danger that must be removed, and on and on.

We all know that trump has just given everyone an assassination list here.

This is very much like the Nazis announcing that Jews are trying to wipe out the Nazis, so the Jews must be exterminated. The obvious reaction by the Jews would be to say that the Nazis cannot be allowed into power, because they want to kill millions of Jews. The Nazis say that proves the Jews are out to get them.

In all these situations there is one side that starts it. We have decades, or even centuries of peace, and then one side decides the peace is not good enough. We all know trump is the one who started the violent rhetoric.
 
Some are the same thing, others are suggesting that Trump is the problem to which the solution is his removal from existence. The difference I would see is in the suggestion that the person is the danger rather than the consequences of their poor decisions being the danger.

So. "If you elect Jimbo Jones, bad things will happen" =/= "Jimbo Jones is a danger to democracy". Can you see the difference? I know you can, actually.

Really?

Who? When?

I've never heard anyone say that the solution to the problems Trump present to our Republic and the world...should be "solved" by his removal from existence, Damo. I have never even seen that inferred by anyone.

Or are you talking about people here in a political forum...where the participants shoot their mouths off any way tey want whenever the want?
 
The irony is trump calling everyone a danger that must be removed has made the obvious rhetorical response to call him a danger that must be removed, which in turn causes him to call everyone a danger that must be removed, and on and on.

We all know that trump has just given everyone an assassination list here.

This is very much like the Nazis announcing that Jews are trying to wipe out the Nazis, so the Jews must be exterminated. The obvious reaction by the Jews would be to say that the Nazis cannot be allowed into power, because they want to kill millions of Jews. The Nazis say that proves the Jews are out to get them.

In all these situations there is one side that starts it. We have decades, or even centuries of peace, and then one side decides the peace is not good enough. We all know trump is the one who started the violent rhetoric.
I love how you say this, but pretend that others rhetoric isn't...

Anyway. The difference is real. "Jimbo Jones is Hitler" is not the same thing as "If you vote for Jimbo Jones he'll make bad things happen (WWIII)"... One suggests a permanent solution to the mind of the crazies the other suggests you don't vote for Jimbo.

Now do I think political rhetoric can be dangerous?... Not really. The same rhetoric has been used without danger for decades and decades... However, leftist politicians have been saying that these statements are the same thing as violence for decades as well if they are stated by anyone on the right, but these same politicians continue to use the rhetoric themselves. If you are going to preach the gospel to the new converts, either follow what you preach and change the rhetoric or take responsibility for what you say since you've told us that it begets violence.
 
Anyway. The difference is real. "Jimbo Jones is Hitler" is not the same thing as "If you vote for Jimbo Jones he'll make bad things happen (WWIII)"... One suggests a permanent solution to the mind of the crazies the other suggests you don't vote for Jimbo.
Whatever happened to "I disagree with many of my opponent's policies, but I do not think he is evil"? McCain actually stood up to people in his own party who called Obama evil, or questioned where he was born. We went from that to "Democrats are all evil, and will destroy America, unless we kill them and their children."

This is out of control. We all know it, but whenever someone says it is crazy we get the claim that being against genocide makes one a Nazi... And that is where we are.

A random 15 year old kid, who had a small business selling books, and encouraging reading, had his picture put up on this very site. He was called a "typical blue state murder"(once again, never even accused of a crime), and was said he should be executed for being Black. I would never have thought such a thing would happen, but now it is just the world trump has given us.

And if anything bad happens to that kid, who is to blame?
 
When they go low, we go high. We remember Michelle saying that. She was urging the Dems not to respond in kind to the debasement of political rhetoric that Trump and the future Repubs were making their standard fare. Trump preaches violence and has since he started.
Vance and Trump are doing terrible things to Springfield endangering the people and the kids. The town has had over 30 bomb threats due to Trump's lies and his repeated use of them. People will die and Trump will not care.
The parties are not the same.
 
Back
Top